It's not that I think it's unique in that regards... it's that it seems built from the ground up to encourage it.
It's admittedly more of an evolution than a revolution... 3E was better than previous editions in this regard, with the greater focus on tactical combat. Most people I know played 2E and before without maps or miniatures, and while I enjoy abstract combat in some games (especially as I'm not a spatial thinker), it's easier for that to devolve into "I hit. I miss. I hit. I hit." than a map where position is absolute and you can be objectively nearer or farther from an opponent, and you can surround a monster or be surrounded.
But 3E still has "save or die" and one hit kills, and in a situation that calls for resourcefulness, a lot of the "resources" are add-ons (wands and potions and scrolls) rather than intrinsic parts of the game (action point, healing surge, dailies).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ninetydegrees
no subject
on 2009-07-19 10:54 pm (UTC)It's admittedly more of an evolution than a revolution... 3E was better than previous editions in this regard, with the greater focus on tactical combat. Most people I know played 2E and before without maps or miniatures, and while I enjoy abstract combat in some games (especially as I'm not a spatial thinker), it's easier for that to devolve into "I hit. I miss. I hit. I hit." than a map where position is absolute and you can be objectively nearer or farther from an opponent, and you can surround a monster or be surrounded.
But 3E still has "save or die" and one hit kills, and in a situation that calls for resourcefulness, a lot of the "resources" are add-ons (wands and potions and scrolls) rather than intrinsic parts of the game (action point, healing surge, dailies).